They're pretty impressive.
« A Will and a Way | Main | William Odom, RIP »
The World's Most Impressive Subways
03 Jun 2008 10:00 am
Comments (40)
Subways? Oh those subways. We call them tubes or the Underground here. A subway is an underground passageway, or a place where you get slimming sandwiches.
I dunno, it's more like "nine big, well known subways and bilbao." And the photos are crap. I doubt much work was put into that slideshow.
Japan is a wealthy first world nation that can afford to make major investments in infrastructure that the US cannot afford.
We're still fighting the cold war and have F-22s and Supercarriers to build.
When you spend more than the rest of the world combined on your military there is no serious money for subways which cost serious money.
Both Japan and the US have made choices.
Rapid transit is apparently the neutral term.
You don't suppose that the oppressive, over-regulating New York City government has anything to do with this?
Growing up in the city, using the subways to get to school, and, to this day, still find the NYC subways to be one of the best transit bargains in the world.
As for Tokyo, I've also been on their subways. During rush hour. Never again...still recovering.
Yeah, I agree with Neil Wilson. I'm not an American, mind you, and I live in Seoul.
No Mexico City? Busier that most, and still quite pleasant. Typical northern bias.
When you spend more than the rest of the world combined on your military there is no serious money for subways which cost serious money.
Don: The US spends a lot of money on guns, but there's plenty left for public sector butter. Currently US total public sector spending -- and that includes every penny going for the military -- is something like 35% of GDP. Government in the United States is still relatively small by rich world standards. Devoting an additional, say, 1.5% of GDP to infrastructure would provide something like $200 billion and still leave the US with a relatively small (again, by rich world standards) public sector.
A bloated military adds to the problem, but the main reason Europe and Japan get lots of shiny new public transport options and America doesn't is that the latter's political culture demonizes taxation.
Government in the United States is still relatively small by rich world standards.
Not by Asian standards.
Oops. I meant to add: So your conclusion doesn't follow:
A bloated military adds to the problem, but the main reason Europe and Japan get lots of shiny new public transport options and America doesn't is that the latter's political culture demonizes taxation.
I could just as easily assert that it's because of the US' culture of individualism rather than collectivism.
Left off the list: Athens, Greece. They're still building the network but that system is amazing, beautiful, functional, affordable...
Huh. I thought u meant the sandwiches for a sec.
Not by Asian standards.
Right. By rich world standards. Had I wanted to use the modifer "Asian" I'd have done so. Your point?
I could just as easily assert that it's because of the US' culture of individualism rather than collectivism.
Oh, kewl, Mr. Liberwhackian. I'll rephrase it for you: America's cult of the individual makes it easy for demagoguing politicians to demonize taxation. So we end up with shitty subways. And pretty crappy highways, bridges and energy infrastructure to boot. Awesome. Oh, our internet access is pricey and slow as well. Who is John Galt?!
What kills me, as an American mass-transit advocate, is how goddamn fast some of these Asian and European systems got built: Shanghai's system is twelve years old and bigger than the L? Bilbao has a system under twenty years old and it appears to be nearing the size of Philadelphia's subway system? And this is a city/metro area that is less than a fourth the size of Philly! I just think it's a shame that there's no will here to make this kind of investment. If Philly were to pump this kind of money into its system, and add just one new line and clean up and renovate its currently disgusting stations, the payoff in property taxes alone would be worth it, not to mention the new tourism dollars if the new lines helped spur growth and change the current perception of the city as islands of charms scattered on a sea of grit.
NYC subway is the dirtiest, smelliest and ugliest subway of all the ones I've been to (and I've been to Europe and Moscow). For a city that features the largest subway system in the country, and which is also the largest tourist destination, one would think it would look just a little nicer (forget about actually improving its functionality like building the second avenue line, installing electronic displays for up to the minute train info, etc).
Another fun fact about the NYC subway it that it does not serve any of the 3 major airports in the NYC metro area.
I'm currently vacationing in Japan for the first time, and the subway system here blows all others out of the frickin water. This system is like the iPhone of subways.
I haven't had to wait for more than 5 minutes for a train; there are monitors on every car (I'm talking about the JR Yamanote line) that track your location within the system in Japanese and English; it's all completely spic and span; the stations are huge bustling affairs--usually with malls attached--and designed so that foot traffic moves in orderly streams; and there are tons of neat touches, like for example each station has a distinct little melody that plays when you stop there, so you can recognize your station just by listening for the right song.
There's nothing like it. It's like a wonder of the world.
I'm stunned Mexico City was left off the list. I've frequented New York's, D.C.'s, Atlanta's and Chicago's rapid transit systems and none of them were as cheap and as clean as Mexico City's.
I'm also a bit amazed that a line was never built anywhere near LaGuardia in NYC. Anyone have an explanation for that?
Agree with David Weman at 10:25. Also, Chicago's CTA is a fucking embarrassment.
The Philadelphia subway is a disgrace. The reason is easy to state: It is run by a regional transit authority, but the subway is entirely within the city limits.
The Tokyo subways rock! And the combination of the subways and the commuter rail lines really rocks! I don't think it would be possible to be somewhere in Tokyo proper (which covers a lot of ground) that's more than a ten-minute walk from a station on some line, and you can get from pretty much any point A to any point B (well, probably 98%) using a maximum of three trains. Find a map of Tokyo that overlays the rail and subway lines, and you'll see what I mean.
I lived in Tokyo for about two years, and despite the fact that I worked for a car company I didn't have a car - I walked, and used the subways and trains (and occasionally the buses).
I'll leave it for others to discuss why we can't have that comprehensiveness in the U.S. (even in New York or Chicago).
I'm also a bit amazed that a line was never built anywhere near LaGuardia in NYC. Anyone have an explanation for that?
Sure. As alluded to above, NYC hasn't built any substantial new lines in seventy-five years or so; in fact, they've ripped a few lines out since. Back before WWII when NYC was last building new infrastructure, airports just weren't particularly important destinations...
The Philadelphia subway is a disgrace. The reason is easy to state: It is run by a regional transit authority, but the subway is entirely within the city limits.
I don't disagree with the condition of the Philadelphia subway/el, but the west end of the Market Street El is actually in Delaware County.
I would think chronic underfunding of SEPTA is the bigger issue, rather than an anti-city bias. On the other hand, the suburban high-speed line I used to ride is much nicer than the El.
I think it's reasonable to argue the U.S. hasn't built enough of anything since the 1970's, including rail transit.
Surely the Pyongyang Metro belongs on the list. Official visitors get a tour of a couple of stations, featuring happy, well-dressed commuters, similing, neatly uniformed employees, spotless platforms and cars, and of course the ever-present portraits of Kim pere and fils. What no one seems to know, however, is whether the system is actually in regular use, or whether it's just a showpiece for visiting dignitaries.
the west end of the Market Street El is actually in Delaware County.
Correction noted. Thanks.
For a city that features the largest subway system in the country, and which is also the largest tourist destination, one would think it would look just a little nicer
Some of it's structural -- most of the underground bits of the NY Subway are barely underground by the standards of the deep-bore Tube lines, which promotes the dinginess. But yeah, it's dark and damp and stinky, the local/express thing is incoherent for anyone from out of town, and the entrances often appear to be hidden in people's basements.
Jasper,
A bloated military adds to the problem, but the main reason Europe and Japan get lots of shiny new public transport options and America doesn't is that the latter's political culture demonizes taxation.
There are a number reasons why Japan and Europe have more public transport than the U.S., most obviously their much higher population densities, but "a bloated military" and "demonizing taxation" are not among them.
When comparing mass transit systems we need to consider the relative noninvolvement of of the US federal government in the affairs of cities. Many European capitals, as showpieces of their respective countries - Paris being a prime example - are lavished with money and attention. This is also certainly true of lots of major Pacific Rim cities. For the most part US cities are at the mercy of state governments and their not-always-farsighted legislatures.
Infrastructure investment in general has been largely neglected in recent decades in the US. At the other end of the scale you have countries like Japan with it's massive (many unnecessary) public works projects.
It also seems important to point out that most metro systems throughout the world are not financially self-sustaining (I don't have the hard data on this at the moment). In the US I think this would tend to be viewed as a sign that a city is financially inept ("Why don't they cut service or increase fares?") rather than seeing the metro as a public good like streets or the sewage system.
Mixner:
There are a number reasons why Japan and Europe have more public transport than the U.S., most obviously their much higher population densities, but "a bloated military" and "demonizing taxation" are not among them.
Yes. I fully agree that a bloated military and the demonization of taxation are not among the reasons Europe and Japan have better public transport than the US.
A bloated military adds to the problem, but the main reason Europe and Japan get lots of shiny new public transport options and America doesn't is that the latter's political culture demonizes taxation.
More importantly than that, America's political culture prizes the car above all other modes of transportation.
I'm disappointed not to see Montreal's Metro on the list. It's certainly not the biggest, but I don't think it has many competitors for clean and reliable (Mexico City and Tokyo, maybe).
There are a number reasons why Japan and Europe have more public transport than the U.S., most obviously their much higher population densities, but "a bloated military" and "demonizing taxation" are not among them.
Are not! Cuz I said so! So there!
If Americans were willing to pay more taxes and fewer tax monies were spent on the military, we still wouldn't have public transport on par with Spain. Why? Because I'm a conservative and my chief mode of self-expression is pithy, know-nothing comments that express cynicism about any government program that doesn't build super awesome robots with guns!
I found the coverage and convenience of the Moscow Metro to be the best I've experienced (I've not been to Asia). I never waited more than three minutes for a train. The tube in London and the Paris Metro are also very good and I was shocked at how good the system in Barcelona was. By contrast, DC's Metro stands out for being highly overrated. New York has the only system in the U.S. that makes a car unnecessary for most purposes.
one unique aspect of the tokyo subway system that I think would be hard to replicate in the US is it isn't run by one company. There are at least 15 different entities that run rail lines within Tokyo. Some public, some private. Beyond the fact that the fares are integrated within these numerous systems is how they share tracks. When I live on the edge of Tokyo I could get on a train, go through Tokyo and continue to about halfway to Mt Fuji. Even though I never actually left the train, in reality I rode on the three different companies trains. First was a Japan Rail line, second was the Chiyoda Line (a subway run by one of the two companies that do subways in Tokyo), and finally the private Odakyu line . I can't imagine that ever working in the US.
I have to add my voice for Athens metro. It's not the most developed system - it's still built after all- but it has to be top three in terms of aesthetics and design managing to blend ancient art with artifacts found during the excavation with modern art.
http://www.amel.gr/index.php?id=193&L=1&station=5
http://www.amel.gr/index.php?id=193&L=1&station=11
nathaniel,
In NY, the subway system, though currently operated by Metropolitan Transportation Authority, was originally built by two different companies. One has lines designated by numbers, the other by letters. In a typical American fashion, the two parts are incompatible with one another and in fact the train cars have different sizes and can only be used in one half of the subway system.
So many subways, and no mention to the most fastest growing system in Europe? Madrid has the second biggest system in Europe (fourth in the world) and it has build more than 100 miles of new lines in the last 12 years. It is clean, fast, cheap and gives a ridiculously good service to a city that is in fact not that big (half the size of Moscow, but more subway lines).
MS:
3 companies with 2 loading gauges (IRT, BMD&IND).
It's not just the US. Many systems globally have multiple rolling stocks depending on track gauge and clearances of lines.
I vote for Buenos Aires. The A (blue) line, with its wooden subway cars and ornate stations, is straight out of the 19th Century.
Right. By rich world standards. Had I wanted to use the modifer "Asian" I'd have done so. Your point?
You used two examples, one of which was Japan. Hate to break it to you, but Japan is in Asia. So you're down to one example to hang your argument on. And I can give you plenty of counterexamples from Asia, who, by your own argument, should be even less equipped to afford proper subways. Your argument is invalid. Get a better one.
By the way, I'm not a libertarian, but thanks for assuming that I was!
Comments closed June 17, 2008.
| 
Heads in the Sand
I go to Tokyo on a regular basis and I use the NY subway a lot.
Tokyo is amazing. I don't take the line very often but the Ginza line has a train every 2 minutes during rush hour and is almost always on time.
Tokyo has finished its THIRD new subway line in 7 years. New York is trying to complete half of a subway line in 7 DECADES.
Absurd
Posted by neil wilson | June 3, 2008 10:21 AM